for the love of God finally!
Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
31–40 of 84 posts
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#32Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#33Can someone explain why this wasn't done long ago? What are the difficulties of putting out a 64 bit build?
I know for a long time there was an issue with Flash not supporting 64 bit browsers (and a browser without flash was hard to sell)
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#34I was using 64 bit for about a week until only just a couple of days ago. It crashed often and in between crashes it kept popping up windows saying that pages were non-responsive (if I want to "wait" or "kill"). Some were actually unresponsive, others were responsive. Unless they fixed these major issues in only the last couple of days, I'm sticking with 32 bit.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#35If I have the 32 bit Chrome, do I need to install a new version, or will updates going forward give me the right architecture?
I just checked chrome://chrome for updates and it confirmed there was no update and 38 was the latest, but when I re-downloaded chrome from https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/ it was the 64-bit v39 - so yes you do need to install a new version!
I doubt they'd stop updating users just because of this change. It's more likely that they roll out the auto-upgrade in stages, rather than having everyone update all at once.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#36If I have the 32 bit Chrome, do I need to install a new version, or will updates going forward give me the right architecture?
Mine just updated to version 39 and it got the 64-bit support.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#37Can anyone here explain the benefits of upgrading to this versus using v38 (32 bit)? Battery life? Less RAM usage? Faster?
Faster, able to use more memory more efficiently. More ram usage.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#382009! They thought they could get it done in time for Snow Leopard GM!
Apparently, Mac OS X isn't exactly a priority for them.
I think that for most purposes 32 bit had worked without much issue so it's a matter of cost vs benefit. Can you think of any issues that people face because Chrome was 32 bit? So far I'm seeing Java 8 integration, which is probably a tiny fraction of their users. Also it's not really breaking since those users can just use Firefox for that purpose. They obviously don't consider this a loss.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#39I wonder why it took so much longer on OS X than Linux?
(I worked on Linux Chrome back in the era when this change was made.)
64-bit was important on Linux because the system libraries that Chrome uses were increasingly unavailable in 32-bit versions on 64-bit systems.
On other platforms, while there are advantages to 64-bit binaries, those advantages haven't outweighed the other useful things you could be spending engineering time on.
Re: Chrome for Mac 64-bit Support
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently, Mac OS X isn't exactly a priority for them.
I think that for most purposes 32 bit had worked without much issue so it's a matter of cost vs benefit. Can you think of any issues that people face because Chrome was 32 bit? So far I'm seeing Java 8 integration, which is probably a tiny fraction of their users. Also it's not really breaking since those users can just use Firefox for that purpose. They obviously don't consider this a loss.
This is true for almost any application (very few things NEED 64 bits).